I just don't get this. The machine doesn't seem to even have that accuracy.
The auto timer is often off by .01-.02. How can some block sensor be deemed accurate to .001?
They don't seem to enforce this in the DL. Way more DQs at Worlds. So what rule do they follow at DL?
I can't speak to the design of this particular equipment, but I can claim domain specific knowledge in precision timekeeping. The time keeping part is trivial at that level of accuracy. The weak link would be the pressure sensor, but a piezo pressure sensor would easily resolve sub-millisecond level events.
Whether the semi-arbitrary cutoff for the rule is set at a reasonable level is arguable. The practical ability to resolve timing to that accuracy probably isn't.
Yes but that’s not really the issue, the issue is what exactly the system is determining.
A FS is when an athlete’s first intentional running movement occurs before the gun sounds—it doesn’t even have to be the case that the CoM translates. This is why you can’t roll out of the blocks, or fall out of a 3-point start, or get a running start and try not to cross the line before the gun sounds.
Before these sensors, such movement was determined visually. It was admittedly imprecise and imperfect, which was why you were allowed multiple FS, after which point guilt was determined on the basis of cumulated data.
This system worked ok until TV scheduling took precedence. Yes it was imperfect and yes sometimes there were abuses of the system, from both athletes and officials.
The currently-used sensor system uses force on the blocks as a proxy for that first intentional running movement. It is an imperfect proxy, for the reasons I mentioned—involuntary twitching, back pressure, position adjustment, etc. The problem is that this imperfect force proxy is now used as a direct substitute for first intentional running movement, which is wrong.
It is wrong because we now have the ability to instantly review high-speed footage, and make a reasoned judgment of what is really the issue, the first intentional running movement. There is no practical need to elevate the flawed proxy to a position of absolute supremacy.
It should be used only as one source of reasonable suspicion, sufficient to trigger a second gun and a visual review and ensuing judgment.
Along with that source of reasonable suspicion needs to be the visual observation of officials, because the flaw works both ways—an athlete CAN FS without it registering on the sensor, via such things as rolling forward, or faulty equipment, right down to a dirty contact.
The rule is BS, universally unfair, and an unjustifiable cop-out by a system full of wanks.
They can do better, RIGHT NOW. They have everything needed, except the courage and honor to say that they were wrong, to accept responsibility for their judgments in the future, and to deal with the flack from broadcasters.
Well stated! all electronic systems need to be calibrated and documented before each and every session. Not just for the track events but also for all the field events. Hayward field electronics have been questionable in the past. We have moved into an era where tech ignorance can no longer be tolerated. Athletes deserve better!
I saw that Allen in the semis started in .101. So you're telling me he just heard the gun on that one perfectly, but in the final he tried to jump the gun and was .002 faster?
Doesn't pass the sniff test. A likely scenario to me is the machine's calibration is off.
Surely the athletes calibration is more accurate than the blocks? Come on wejo.
It should be 0.00 as the tolerance. If you go before the official registers the start, then it is a DQ. Stop putting limits on human reaction time, and also give room for discrepancies in equipment. If someone want to guess the start and put their olympic/WC hopes to chance, then so be it.
This .100 goes into the realm of over thought like the new asinine LJ plane rule. It used to be a still image at the moment of impact, but they have tried to overthink it and have a vertical plane put in. So the jumper can be 2 cm behind the foul line, but still scratch as the foot "rolls" over. The foot is behind the line always, but is ruled a scratch because the laces or toe float over the line before the spikes leave the board. Rules are in place to provide clear structure, but shouldn't overthink or take from the competition.
Sorry, but you have to set that cutoff somewhere. Once the cutoff is set, enforce it. Everyone knows the rules and can plan accordingly. Not sure why people are confused or angry.
I agree that you need a cut-off and it should be enforced but that doesn't mean people can't argue for a rule change. Allen was .101 in the semi-final and .099 in the final. That does not make sense that the semi-final was a acceptable reaction time and the final was anticipating and cheating. The rule must change. There were multiple .10x across the races so being .099 is not surprising. Who calibrated the computer to within .0001? Maybe the rule should have a time (like .100 or .090) where the race continues and another time (like .070) where there is a re-start but no DQ's.
I think they should scrap the cutoff and just go with the gun. If an athlete jumps the gun and gets it right, more power to him/her. Luck is an intrinsic part of all sport. We don’t DQ a high jumper because they came within 1mm of the bar. Surely no high jumper can “aim” to that kind of tolerance.
I also don’t think the one and done DQ rule is good for the sport. A long jumper isn’t DQ’ed for a foul, yet they’re trying to maximize every possible millimeter out of their approach. It’s a foul. Not a DQ. Sprinters should be given an equivalent of a foul.
I’d suggest rather than help viewership, as these made for TV schedule rules intend, they harm it .. The entire TnF audience is bummed when Devon Allen or Usain Bolt or whoever doesn’t get to run. If it takes a few extra minutes to get the race underway because of false starts, I’d prefer that over athletes not being allowed to run at all.
Sorry, but you have to set that cutoff somewhere. Once the cutoff is set, enforce it. Everyone knows the rules and can plan accordingly. Not sure why people are confused or angry.
there is no reason you can't have a gray zone where you go to slowed down visual evidence. this isn't hard science they are using.
Yeah, right, because a gray zone where was can introduce human subjectivity and emotions always helps in such situations. The Russian judge gave him Allen a 7!
I can't speak to the design of this particular equipment, but I can claim domain specific knowledge in precision timekeeping. The time keeping part is trivial at that level of accuracy. The weak link would be the pressure sensor, but a piezo pressure sensor would easily resolve sub-millisecond level events.
Whether the semi-arbitrary cutoff for the rule is set at a reasonable level is arguable. The practical ability to resolve timing to that accuracy probably isn't.
Yes but that’s not really the issue, the issue is what exactly the system is determining.
A FS is when an athlete’s first intentional running movement occurs before the gun sounds—it doesn’t even have to be the case that the CoM translates. This is why you can’t roll out of the blocks, or fall out of a 3-point start, or get a running start and try not to cross the line before the gun sounds.
Before these sensors, such movement was determined visually. It was admittedly imprecise and imperfect, which was why you were allowed multiple FS, after which point guilt was determined on the basis of cumulated data.
This system worked ok until TV scheduling took precedence. Yes it was imperfect and yes sometimes there were abuses of the system, from both athletes and officials.
The currently-used sensor system uses force on the blocks as a proxy for that first intentional running movement. It is an imperfect proxy, for the reasons I mentioned—involuntary twitching, back pressure, position adjustment, etc. The problem is that this imperfect force proxy is now used as a direct substitute for first intentional running movement, which is wrong.
It is wrong because we now have the ability to instantly review high-speed footage, and make a reasoned judgment of what is really the issue, the first intentional running movement. There is no practical need to elevate the flawed proxy to a position of absolute supremacy.
It should be used only as one source of reasonable suspicion, sufficient to trigger a second gun and a visual review and ensuing judgment.
Along with that source of reasonable suspicion needs to be the visual observation of officials, because the flaw works both ways—an athlete CAN FS without it registering on the sensor, via such things as rolling forward, or faulty equipment, right down to a dirty contact.
The rule is BS, universally unfair, and an unjustifiable cop-out by a system full of wanks.
They can do better, RIGHT NOW. They have everything needed, except the courage and honor to say that they were wrong, to accept responsibility for their judgments in the future, and to deal with the flack from broadcasters.
This system worked ok until TV scheduling took precedence. Yes it was imperfect and yes sometimes there were abuses of the system, from both athletes and officials.
The old system sucked as you would routinely get 3 or 4 guys trying to time the gun since you got a freebie...
Maybe DA can can consistently react in .099-.102 and the system is unfair and the time should be dropped to .095. it seems equally likely he is .11-.12 guy like everyone else and was anticipating
Shout out to to coaches that tell their athletes to go after the gun. Trying to go at the gun causes anticipation and false starts. Secondly, he was first to set and popped into set quickly, all no no's. Gun also held long to boot. He didnt get some magical once in a lifetime start. He was nervous, overly anxious and anticipated the gun. All those factors equal a false start. Such a wasted coachable moment for young athletes
This system worked ok until TV scheduling took precedence. Yes it was imperfect and yes sometimes there were abuses of the system, from both athletes and officials.
The old system sucked as you would routinely get 3 or 4 guys trying to time the gun since you got a freebie...
Maybe DA can can consistently react in .099-.102 and the system is unfair and the time should be dropped to .095. it seems equally likely he is .11-.12 guy like everyone else and was anticipating
Nobody is advocating a return to the old system. The rule is that if you FS, you are out, unless you have a reasonable and verifiable excuse like a noise in the stands, a movement by something or another athlete.
That’s fine.
The problem is that the proxy that is the force measurement SHOULD NEVER BE ELEVATED TO A POSITION OF ABSOLUTE SUPREMACY, BECAUSE DOING SO IS INCONSISTENT WITH THE RULE.
I won’t get into a textual analysis of the rule. I will say that the official abdicated his responsibility to exercise his own judgment, as required by the rule.
The current tech is workable if installed, maintained and calibrated correctly—including the blocks with sensors, the speakers, the sensor on the gun, and the high-speed camera. The tools are very good, the main one being the camera and video review—all that is needed is to employ them correctly, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RULE.
Even if the sensor was faulty, ultimately this is a failure in officiating. The fault lies with the on-site officials, and whoever or whatever group or administrative body trained them and ensures that their qualifications are maintained.
It should be 0.00 as the tolerance. If you go before the official registers the start, then it is a DQ. Stop putting limits on human reaction time, and also give room for discrepancies in equipment. If someone want to guess the start and put their olympic/WC hopes to chance, then so be it.
This .100 goes into the realm of over thought like the new asinine LJ plane rule. It used to be a still image at the moment of impact, but they have tried to overthink it and have a vertical plane put in. So the jumper can be 2 cm behind the foul line, but still scratch as the foot "rolls" over. The foot is behind the line always, but is ruled a scratch because the laces or toe float over the line before the spikes leave the board. Rules are in place to provide clear structure, but shouldn't overthink or take from the competition.
100% agree.
World Athletics seems to completely misunderstand what sport is for. It is to provide entertainment.
When a stadium full of fans are booing and all of Twitter is calling the final a farce, is World Athletics really doing the right thing for the sport? They are killing it themselves.
Every major champs seems to be full of DQs and insane decisions based on the Bible-sized rulebook which World Athletics holds closer to it's chest than any attempt to make the sport popular.
If the governing body can't serve the sport well, then it is time for change.
Sorry, but you have to set that cutoff somewhere. Once the cutoff is set, enforce it. Everyone knows the rules and can plan accordingly. Not sure why people are confused or angry.
It should be done like it is for horses, put a gate in front so if you false start you just crash into it.
Reviewing the video of the 110 Hurdles race, there are actually 3 speakers behind the runners. The closest one to Devon Allen was on the line between lanes 4 and 5. Allen was in lane 3 and Holloway in 4, giving Holloway an advantage. The advantage amounts to 0.00289 seconds per meter of additional distance from the speaker. I estimate about a third of a meter greater distance from the speaker to Allen, so almost 0.001 seconds.
There is no logical reason the meet organizers should be concerned about a 0.001 advantage in reaction time for Allen but not worried about a similar advantage for Holloway due to speed of sound considerations. This makes no sense other than no one has ever scientifically bothered to consider it.
Yet another issue is the starter’s failure to require Holloway to come to a legal set position and hold. The rules require a runner to immediately come up to a set position upon hearing the “Set” command and remain still. Holloway slowly moved to a set position with hips high, then slowly begins moving his hips downwards in order to gain a rolling start advantage, and never comes to a still position. The starter is required to abort the start and give the runner a warning. A second infraction results in disqualification.
So this start never should have happened but for the starter’s failure to observe this. Holloway does this every time. Starters need to watch video and warn runners prior to the race that this will not be tolerated, then enforce it.
This under-scores the primary problem with Professional Track & Field - it is a profession sport run by amateurs in a very amateur manner.
The very fact that the reaction rule is not completely science based speaks to this point. If it was it wouldn't be a nice pretty round number like 0.100 Rather it would use science and be a precise 0.8439. But instead they round for "ease" of use or ignorance or not knowing any better. It's an amateur'ish decided rule and Devon paid the price. I don't blame him on moving on to a real professional sport.
